This file was created by scanning the printed publication. Errors identified by the software have been corrected; however, some errors may remain.

Elk Response to the La Mesa Fire and Current Status in the Jemez Mountains

Craig D. Allen 1

Abstract.-Faunal remains in local archeological sites~nd historic infor­ mation suggest that elk populations in the Jemez Mountains were low from ca. 1200 A.D. through ca. 1900 A.D., when they were extirpated from this region. Elk were reintroduced to the Jemez country in 1948 and 1964- 1965, and their population apparently grew exponentially, reaching 1000 animals in the 1970's and about 7000 by 1991. Elk populations in Bandelier National Monument and adjoining areas increased rapidly after the 1977 La Mesa Fire. Winter use by elk in the La Mesa Fire area, centered on Bandelier, grew from about 100 animals in .1978 to around 1500 elk by 1992. The dramatic increase in the Bandelier elk herd (an annual growth rate of 21.3% and a 3.6 year population dou­ bling time) was due in part to the creation of about 6000 hectares of grassy winter range in and around the park by the La Mesa Fire. Some of this local population increase reflects concentration of elk into this favorable wintering habitat from surrounding portions of the Jemez Mountains. Existing data are inadequate to determine whether elk populations are still growing rapidly in the Jemez Mountains. While annual aerial surveys since 1990 in Bandelier reveal no clear population trend, a variety of ob­ servations demonstrate increasing elk use of lower elevation areas. Nega­ tive resource impacts from today's high elk populations are beginning to be widely noted across the Jemez Mountains, especially in high-use por­ tions of the Bandelier National Monument area. Affected resources range from plant communities to soils and even archeological sites. Given the large uncertainties associated with the current data on elk populations, care should be taken to avoid further population increases until the re­ source impacts of this new phenomenon (large numbers of elk) can be identified, desirable population levels identified (based to a significant de­ gree upon ecological information and resource carrying capacities, as well as social considerations), and appropriate cooperative management strat­ egies implemented.

INTRODUCTION Prehistoric Elk Abundance The habitat changes associated with the La Mesa Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus nelson i) are Fire have benefited some species, prominently in­ considered native to the Jemez Mountains (Bailey cluding elk. This paper reviews elk response to the 1931). Figure 1 shows a prehistoric elk petroglyph, La Mesa Fire, and provides an overview of the past and current status of this species in the southeast­ 1 Research Ecologist, National Biological Service, Jemez Mts. Field ern Jemez Mountains. Station, HeR 1, Box 1, #15, Los Alamos, NM 87544

179 Figure 1.-Prehistoric elk petroglyph, White Rock Canyon near Bandelier National Monument. Horizontal scale is 10 cm long with 1 cm subdivisions, while the vertical rod is divided into 25 cm sections. Photograph by Betty Lilienthal, ARMS Site Files collection, Laboratory of Anthropology, Santa Fe, New Mexico. etched into a basalt boulder in White Rock Canyon Bandelier area from the Great Plains to the east.) near Bandelier National Monument. Elk were Kay (1990) reviews various factors that could bias present here into the late 19th Century, but by 1906 the relative proportions of faunal remains exca­ they had probably been eliminated from the Jemez vated from archeological sites (e.g., differential country (Bailey 1931:40). preservation or field disposal of bone from larger ungulates by butchering at the kill site), concluding There is no evidence that elk were ever abundant that these processes would not unduly discrimi­ during prehistoric or historic times in the Bandelier nate against the presence of elk materials. If true, area. Table 1 displays a compilation of ungulate the paucity of local elk remains suggests low elk faunal remains recovered from 45 local archeologi­ populations in and around today's Bandelier Na­ cal sites (Allen-in review), almost all dating to tional Monument during the main period of pre­ before 1500 A.D. Out of a total of 218 ungulate in­ historic occupation (roughly 1200-1500 A.D.). dividuals which were determined to species (based The large sample of excavated faunal remains (at upon a total of 646 identified bones), only three least 226 ungulate individuals) from nearby Arroyo individual elk were determined (based upon nine Hondo (Lang and Harris 1984), outside Santa Fe, identified elk bones); eight of these elk bones date similarly shows few elk remains (Table 1). The ab­ from the late 1800's, while the ninth was a 15th sence of any elk remains during the period of peak Century bone tool which might easily have been human popUlation suggests that ancestral imported. While deer remains dominate local ar­ Puebloan peoples may have eliminated local elk cheological faunal assemblages, bighorn sheep, populations (Lang and Harris 1984:49). pronghorn, and even bison remains exceed those of elk. (Since bison were absent from the local fauna Indeed, a strong case has recently been made for their remains were presumably traded into the prehistoric aboriginal control of elk numbers across

180 Table 1.-Ungulate remains recovered from archeological sites in and around the Jemez Mountains.

Minimum Number of Individuals

Deer Elk Bighorn Antelope Bison Ungulate

Jemez Mts. (45 sites) 154 3 30 24 7 58 Arroyo Hondo (Santa Fe) 157 6 56 7 213

Total 311 9 30 80 14 271

Number of Identified Specimens (Minimum Estimate)

Deer Elk Bighorn Antelope Bison Ungulate

Jemez Mts. (45 sites) 515 9 32 24 66 1,126 Arroyo Hondo (Santa Fe) 300 9 77 11 568

Total 815 18 32 101 77 1,694 widespread portions of the western U.S. and Puebloans who inhabited this region after circa Canada (Kay 1990 and 1994, Martin and Szuter-in 1200 A.D. review). Kay (1994) bases his "aboriginal overkill" hypothesis of elk population control on various factors which also would have applied to South­ Historic Elk Abundance western Pre-Columbian peoples, including: 1) the Historic documents further suggest low elk efficiency of Native American predation; which populations in the Jemez Mountains area since included cooperative hunting, use of dogs, food Anglo-American contact. In the 1880's Adolph storage, ability to switch to non-ungulate foods, Bandelier attributed the local scarcity of game, in­ and various effective hunting techniques (such as cluding elk, to Native American hunting (Bandelier running down elk in deep snow); 2) optimal-forag­ 1892:141). Henderson and Harrington (1914:3) state ing studies which suggest that elk would have that for the overall American Southwest: "A study been a preferred prey species; 3) low elk numbers of the literature of early exploration does not indi­ in the ungulate species remains found in archaeo­ cate general distribution of vast herds of antelope, logical contexts compared with the ratios of elk, and deer-and especially this is true of elk". present ungulate communities; 4) the high num­ More particularly, by the latter half of the 1800's elk bers of Native Americans which were present in were certainly scarce in the Jemez Mountains area many areas before Old World diseases drastically (Henderson and Harrington 1914:2-3), becoming reduced the aboriginal populations; 5) a presumed extinct around the turn of the century. It is curious lack of effective Native American conservation that the grassy, fire-maintained, open forests which practices; and 6) synergism between human and characterized much of the Jemez landscape in ear­ carnivore predation in suppressing prey lier centuries apparently supported so few elk. Per­ populations. haps the pre-1880 recurrence of landscape-wide Focussed more specifically on the Southwest, fires across the Jemez Mountains every 20 or so Osborn (1993) reviews rationales for high levels of years (Allen et al. 1995, Touchan et al., This Vol­ ungulate utilization by prehistoric Native Ameri­ ume) contributed to the effects of human and wild cans, suggesting that the stereotype of the Anasazi­ carnivore predation to constrain elk populations by Hohokam-Mogollon peoples as farmers under­ occasionally imposing limited forage availability states the importance of big game food resources, across broad portions of their mountain refuges, and thus hunting, in their subsistence patterns. forcing more elk down into areas where human Certainly crossing the mesas of the Bandelier area hunting pressures were greater. In any event, by during Anasazi times would have required run­ the time of Vernon Bailey's biological surveys of ning a gauntlet of protein-hungry, crop-defending the Jemez area in 1904 and 1906 elk were appar­ humans. Overall, it is plausible to envision that elk ently extirpated. As he stated (Bailey 1931:40): numbers in the Jemez Mountains area were sup­ In 1906, the writer saw a fair-sized elk horn in a pressed by the large numbers of ancestral good state of preservation on the fence at a Mexi-

181 can ranch near Jemez Hot Springs, and was told the increased protection that it offered from poach­ that it was picked up on Cebolla Creek in the cen­ ing and other human disturbances. In 1964-1965 tral part of the Jemez Mountains. He could get no another 58 elk from the Jackson Hole area were records of elk in the Jemez Mountains in recent released into the mountains of Los Alamos County years, but has no doubt that they once covered adjacent to Bandelier (White 1981). these mountains, which are in close connection The elk population in the Jemez Mountains (de­ with the San Juan Range. lineated as Unit 6 by NMGF) has apparently exhib­ Overall, the available evidence suggests that ited exponential population growth over at least since the La Mesa Fire the Jemez Mountains popula­ portions of the past 47 years (Figure 2). If the popu­ tion of reintroduced elk has grown to levels far lation grew from 28 elk in 1948 to 200 animals in greater than anything known since at least A.D. 1200. 1961, this represents a 16.3% annual increase and a 4.6 year doubling time. By 1989 the Unit 6 elk herd had grown to an estimated level of roughly 6000- ELK POPULATION TRENDS - 8000 individuals, with about 3500 elk summering on the Baca Location (R. Isler, NMGF-1989 per­ IN THE JEMEZ MOUNTAINS sonal communication); this remains the range of "official" NMGF population estimates (L. Fisher- Reintroduction and Population Growth 1995 personal communication). However, note that a long-time Unit 6 wildlife officer has consistently In 1948 the New Mexico Game and Fish (NMGF) estimated only 3500-5000 elk in the Jemez area for Department released 21 cows/calves and 7 bulls of the period 1990-1995 (P. Cassid y-1995 personal Cervus elaphus nelsoni, from Yellowstone National communication). For the time period 1948-1992, Park, into the Jemez Mountains in "the Clear Creek given the increase from the original 28 planted elk area" on the south side of the San Pedro parks (let­ to an estimated 7000 elk, the calculated annual ter of 19 Dec., 1961, from NMGF Director Fred Th­ growth rate for the Jemez elk herd is 13.4%, with a ompson to Bandelier National Monument). doubling time of 5.5 years. If the elk population is Bandelier's 1948 "Annual Wildlife Report" esti­ assumed to have grown from 200 animals in 1961 mates a population of 5 elk in the park, noting: to the median NMGF estimate of 7000 animals in This is the first report of elk on the Bandelier 1992, this indicates a 12.2% annual population area. In early May of this year 28 elk were in­ growth, with a doubling time of 6.0 years. This troduced to the higher Jemez (m}ountains to _ large population growth o~curred despite signifi­ the north and east (sic-should be west) of the cant increases in permitted elk hunting in Unit 6 monument by the State Fish and Game De­ since 1980 (Table 3). partment. On July 9 the tracks of a bull and Rapid growth of elk populations has also occur­ cow elk were observed on trails in the upper red in the state as a whole. By 1910 all elk popula­ portions of Bandelier (author's note: likely on tions in New Mexico were considered extirpated the mesa south of Upper Crossing at about (Bailey 1931:40-44, Findley 1987:141-142), probably 2200 m elevation, given the different park due to uncontrolled hunting and competition for boundary of that time). On September 15 four herbaceous forage with domestic livestock. Rocky bulls were seen in the lower end of Alamo Mountain elk reintroductions into New Mexico Canyon near our southern boundary. We shall began in 1911 (Bailey 1931:41). Elk populations watch with keen interest the activities of these grew to estimated statewide population levels of 32 newcomers during the winter months (S. in 1911 (Bailey 1931:41), "about 60" in 1912 Keefe, 25 Sept., 1948, report on file at Bandelier (Findley 1987:142), 126 in 1914 (compiled from National Monument). Bailey 1931:41), 750 in 1923 (Findley 1987), 680 in By 1961 NMGF estimated a population of at least 1926 (Ligon 1927:71), between 3500 (Bryant and 200 elk in the Jemez Mountains, all descendants of Maser 1982) and "perhaps 4000" (Findley 1987) in the 28 founders (letter of 19 Dec., 1961, from 1934, "almost 11,000" in 1967 (Findley 1987), and NMGF on file at Bandelier). Yet from 1948-1965 elk 10-12,000 elk by 1976 (Bryant and Maser 1982). The were rarely seen in Bandelier, with p-ark population 1992 population was estimated to be 40,000 elk (D. estimates ranging from 0 to 6 individuals (incom­ Weybright, NMGF-1992 personal communica­ plete set of annual wildlife reports on file at tion). If there were 10,800 elk in 1967 and 40,000 in Bandelier). The park apparently did not provide 1992, this would indicate a 5.4% annual growth particularly good elk habitat at that time, despite rate and a 13.2 year doubling time over this period.

182 100000 :::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::i:::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::r.:::::::::::::::::::::::::r.::::::::::::::::::::::::t::::::::::: .....---..I..--~--.r....--~oo.I.ot ...... )...... + ...... : ...... : ...... : ...... •.•...•.... :~!~:;i~~ns········I:···:· •...:·.t········.·T.·::·:···:·I:.:··.:E··:? ...... Bandelier NM .. ·· ...... ·~ .. ·...... ·.... ·[· ...... f...... ·.. f· ...... ·.. ·...... ·t .... ·...... 10000 .i·!······!:··::!·:·.::·::··':.::::.I··:::·::I:::::~··.!:

~ 1000 1:!:I::::I:h::::;~::I~::::::::I:::··::r::::::·:!~: :::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::: ... :::::::.::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::r::::Jntt-odiUe:ed:::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::r::::::::::::::::::::::F::::::::: -o L- a> ..0 E ~ 100

10

1 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 Year

Figure 2.-Estimated changes in elk populations in New Mexico ("Statewide"), the Jemez Mountains, and Bandelier National Monument. Note the logarithmic scale on the y-axis.

Alternatively, if we assume 11,000 elk in 1976 and widely used, results are biased by numerous fac­ still 40,000 in 1992, this translates into a 8.4% an­ tors including speed and height of flight, transect nual growth rate and a 8.6 year doubling time for width, terrain, variation in observers and pilots, the period 1976-1992. It is thought by NMGF that time of day, snow conditions, and low elk the total number of elk in New Mexico has in­ sightability in many forested habitats (Caughley creased little, if at all, since 1992 because of high 1974, Davis and Winstead 1980, Samuel et al. 1987, harvest levels (L. Fisher-1995 personal communica­ Kie 1988). The probability of sighting elk in the tion). Statewide, the annual (legal) elk harvest has Rocky Mountains is quite variable and usually less increased from about 2800 in 1985 to 11,000 in 1993, than 50% (Bear et al. 1989). During winter surveys wit4 a concurrent increase in cow elk taken from 800 bulls are typically alone or in small bachelor to 5,000 (L. Fisher-1995 personal communication). groups which are relatively hard to spot from the air compared to the larger cow / calf bands, intro­ Uncertainties in Elk Population Data ducing another bias. Thus NMGF estimates of elk populations in particular areas (like Unit 6) are It is difficult to accurately determine elk popula­ rather imprecise, inasmuch as they are largely tion parameters in forested, montane wildlands based upon limited, non-systematic, aerial surveys like the Jemez Mountains. While aerial surveys are and the field impressions of local wildlife officers.

183 These same sampling biases also affect recent even in the surveyed areas the flight pattern inten­ aerial surveys at Bandelier (Table 2, Figure 3), de­ sity is inadequate to fully cover the complicated spite efforts to minimize these effects through rela­ terrain-about 1/3 of the surface area of these tively intensive and spatially systematic flights "surveyed" uplands is likely missed in any given with experienced NMGF observers. Bandelier's year. annual survey counts have averaged 70% of the total elk surveyed by NMGF in Unit 6 since 1990 Note that the "percent of total elk counted which (range = 46% to 98%, Table 2), reflecting the rela­ were not classified" (into gender or age classes) is tive intensity of the park's surveys (as well as the over 50% for most of the recent Bandelier surveys easily visible concentrations of elk in the open burn (Table 2). This is because large herds of 100-200+ areas). These annual park flights have also main­ individuals are typically encountered in the La tained relatively consistent spatial coverage be­ Mesa Fire area (Figure 3), and it is hard to accu­ tween years across the La Mesa Fire area. However, rately classify such big groups. Since these large significant portions of the park have remai!led un­ unclassified groups are usually cow / calf herds, the surveyed in these efforts, including the Sandoval true ratio of bulls to cows in Bandelier is likely County portions of the upper Frijoles watershed lower than presented in Table 2, while the true ra­ and the deep and extensive canyon systems. Also, tio of calves to cows is uncertain.

Table 2.-Winter aerial count data, elk, Bandelier National Monument.

# % % Bull: JUV: # Year ELK ? #6 COW 0 ~ :JUV ADUL MIN ElM

1984 345 0 .03 19 100 50 .42 52 6.6 1985 281 0 66 .21 52 100 67 .44 ?60 ?4.7

1987 395 0 66 .25 38 100 63 .46 87 4.5

1990 504 .80 83 .80 93 100 29 .15 93 5.4 1991 907 .42 98 .26 41 100 38 .27 138 6.6 1992a 777 .63 .43 59 100 38 .24 79 9.8 1992b 867 .65 82 .45 62 100 38 .24 155 5.6 1993 499 0 47 .15 25 100 29 .23 214 2.3 1994 939 .71 66 .31 40 100 45 .32 200 4.7 1995 548 .62 46 .20 43 100 66 .46 115 4.8

Explanation of Headings (from left to right):

YEAR = year of helicopter survey (precise dates listed below) 1984 = 2/2/84 1985 = 1/7/85 1987 = 1/23/87 1990 = 1/31/90 1991 = 1/28/91 1992a = 2/11/92 (first 79 minutes) 1992b = 2/11/92 (all 155 minutes, last 76 minutes spent in low-elevation, pinon-juniper woodlands) 1993 = 2/1/93 (note that much of this flight time was spent over low-elevation, barren, pinon-juniper woodlands where few ungulates were observed) 1994 = 2/17/94 (little snow cover) 1995 = 2/7/95 (little snow cover) # ELK = total # elk counted % ? = percent of the total elk counted which were not classified % 6 = percent of the total elk surveyed by NMGF in Unit 6 BULL:COW = ratio of adult male to non-juvenile female (cow) elk o = number of adult and yearling males per 100 cows ~ = number of cow elk, standardized at 100 :JUV = number of calves per 100 cows JUV:ADUL = ratio of juveniles to adult elk # MIN = number of flight minutes spent counting ungulates E/M = number of elk counted per minute of flight counting time

184 Elk Mortality elk, respectively, in Unit 6 (P. Cassidy-1993 per­ sonal communication), but substantIve corroborat­ Estimates of elk mortality by NMGF are also ing data are lacking. Mortality rates from other beset with large uncertainties, since they are prima­ causes (e.g., natural predation, disease) are un­ rily derived from voluntary mail-return surveys of known. Take of elk on Native American lands (e.g., hunter success. Uncertain biases and low return the local pueblos of Santa Clara, San Ildefonso, rates plague such surveys; e.g., statewide survey Cochiti, Zia, and Jemez) is unregulated by the State return rates since the mid-1980's range from 25- of New Mexico and currently unassessed by 33% (L. Fisher-1995 personal communication). A NMGF. Overall, the data currently available to possible, cost-effective, remedy is to utilize tele­ NMGF do not allow precise determination of ongo­ phone surveys, which can provi~e more compre­ ing elk population status or trends at local or re­ hensive and accurate results (SteInert et al. 1994). gional scales. I Results from mail-in surveys since 1988 in Unit 6 Elk populations in the Bandelier area may ~ave suggest that the success rates of bow hunters have high survival rates, facilitating rapid pop~latIon hovered around 20%, rifle success rates around growth. White (1981) presented loc.al survIva.1 data 30%, and private land hunter success rates between on 28 radio-collared elk for the penod spannIng 65% and 80%. The surveys indicate that about 1000 early 1978 to May 1980. Sixteen elk were collared in elk are killed by state-regulated hunter~ each yea~ early 1978 and 12 in early 197~. Twelve of 13 c~lves in Unit 6 (Table 3). Poaching and roadkIlls are estI­ survived at least through the fIrst year after beIng mated to annually kill an additional 200 and 100 collared (in winter)-the,one death was apparently caused by lightning. Twenty-three?f 2.8 total ~lk lived through the first year of monItonng, whIle 13 of 16 survived at least 25 months. Of the 28 col­ lared elk, 22 were still alive in May 1980. Causes of

\ mortality were legal hunting (2), poaching (2), lightning (1), and malnutrition (1). One of the col­ lared females has been seen repeatedly in Bandelier as late as the winter of 1993-94, demon­ strating local survival in the wild for at least 15 and one-half years. Note that legal harvest of elk has increased markedly since the White study ended (Table 3).

'0 • .' Table 3.-Harvest history of elk in the Jemez Mountains (Unit 6). o 0 0 La Mesa Fire Data from New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, extrapolated from mail-in survey estimates of hunter success. • 1 Elk Data for 1987 are not available. Explanation of headings: # HUNT = • 2 Elk # of licensed hunters, TOTAL =Total # elk legally killed by hunters; • 5 Elk :.'. \. o =# male elk legally killed by hunters; 9 =# female elk legally o 10 Elk killed by hunters. o 20 Elk 'j o 50 Elk f '. o 100 Elk \ \'. YEAR # HUNT TOTAL 0 9 '0- 0200 Elk .~ 1981 44 39 39 0 N 1982 1716 286 271 15 1- 1983 1953 290 265 25 f--t----j 1984 2125 526 358 168 o 1 2 kilometers 1985 2017 379 350 29 1986 2262 416 354 62 Figure 3.-Aerial survey observations of elk at Bandelier National 1987 Monument, 1990-1995, excluding 1993. Each point represents 1988 2635 728 515 213 an observation in a particular year. The solid line represents 1989 3053 855 540 315 the park boundary, dashed lines major canyon drainages. 1990 3172 1086 622 464 Adjoining lands include the Santa Fe National Forest (west, 1991 3392 1029 640 389 southeast and north), Los Alamos National Laboratory 1992 3178 1000 676 324 (northeast): the Baca Ranch (northwest), and Canada de Cochiti 1993 2535 968 587 381 (south). The northwestern and southwestern portions of the park 1994 3223 1458 771 688 were essentially not surveyed in these years.

185 White's biotelemetry study (1981) also showed hicles by road hunters scare the elk into less acces­ that most of the collared elk were part of a popula­ sible portions of Forest Service land (where fewer tion that was relatively immune to hunting mortal­ hunters venture) or onto protected areas, such as ity because of the geography of local land owner­ Bandelier National Monument and LANL lands, ships. These elk largely summered (and calved) in and hunter success is limited. So, while reducing the high elevation forests and meadows of the Baca open road density improves the quality of elk habi­ Ranch, moving to wintering areas on Bandelier and tat (and hunting success), it reduces the number of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Elk are hunters who are willing to access the roadless ar­ protected from public hunting across this 65,000 ha eas, especially as horses, carts, or snowmobiles expanse of connected lands, although several hun­ become nearly essential to pack kills out to the dred elk permits are issued to the Baca Ranch each nearest road. year. It is presumed that a large portion of the cur­ rent, larger elk population in the Bandelier area Overall, the existing data, as well as much anec­ continues to follow this seasonal migration pattern, dotal information, suggests that elk populations in which provides year-round access to the security, the Jemez Mountains, as in much of New Mexico, food and water supplies, and cover that elk need. are still expanding their distribution, and perhaps their numbers. The spread and exponential in­ Differences between aerial survey data collected crease of New Mexico elk populations through in February 1995 from Bandelier (Table 2) and the circa 1990 (Figure 2) indicates that hunting harvests rest of Unit 6 (L. Fisher-1995 personal communi­ were conservative enough to allow elk populations cation) hint at either the coarse resolution of these to grow markedly, as intended by NMGF to restore data, or perhaps mortality differences between sub­ elk to its native range in New Mexico. Population populations in this unit. While the Bandelier sur­ trends in the 1990' s are not yet clear. vey noted 548 elk (62% not classified), th~ surveys outside Bandelier counted 656 animalslwith only 15% not classified (as there were no big groups of RESPONSE OF ELKTOTHE LA MESA FIRE 100+ elk). The bull:cow:calf ratios differed mark­ edly between Bandelier, at 43:100:66, and the rest of The area around Bandelier and Los Alamos Na­ Unit 6 at 28:100:37. If these values accurately de­ tional Laboratory was the focus of much research scribe the sampled elk "populations", they suggest on elk immediately after the 1977 La Mesa Fire. that bulls are more heavily harvested and repro­ Studies conducted locally included radiotelemetry ductive success is lower outside the relative protec­ research on 30 collared elk (White 1981, White tion offered to the Bandelier /Los Alamos/Baca 1983), changes in utilization and migration pat­ Ranch population. Alternatively, differences in terns, including information from 70 permanent these values between populations might simply pellet transects (Conley et al. 1979), diets and reflect sampling problems. physiologic response to differing diets (Rowland et al. 1983, Weber et al. 1984), and radionuclide con­ The most important natural predator of elk in centrations in elk tissues (Meadows and Salazar the Jemez Mountains, the gray wolf (Canis lupus), 1982, Meadows and Hakonson 1982). These studies was eliminated from the area by the mid-20th Cen­ found that: 1) in the Jemez Mountains elk were tury (Brown 1988). People have also made attempts primarily grazers, although they also used woody to reduce local populations of another elk predator, browse species (Rowland et al. 1983, Wolters, This the mountain lion (Felis concolor) (Allen 1989:153), Volume); 2) local elk use was concentrated on non­ although Bandelier certainly harbors a number of forest or early successional forest areas, promi­ lions today, as tracks and droppings are commonly nently including about 50 ha affected by two wild­ found (5. Fettig-unpublished data). Without their fires in the early 1950's just above West Jemez Road primary natural predator (wolves), New Mexico (White 1981:3); and 3) in the Jemez Mountains elk populations must ultimately be limited by ei­ most elk spent the majority of the year at upper ther human hunting or by starvation/ disease types elevations, especially on the Baca Ranch, with the of mortality when habitat resource limits are bulk of the population seasonally migrating to exceeded. lower elevation sites as needed to avoid deep win­ ter snows. There are practical limits to the number of elk that can be harvested from Santa Fe National For­ Since the 1977 La Mesa Fire the population of the est lands (the primary public hunting grounds in Bandelier area elk herd has increased dramatically Unit 6). In areas of high road density, use of ve- (Figure 2), due to intrinsic population increase

186 combined with in-migration to about 6000 ha. of fire-created, grassy winter range. Conley et al. (1979) estimated that less than 100 elk wintered on Bandelier in 1977-78, and 296 in 1978-79. In 1979- 80 an estimated 200-400 elk wintered in the La Mesa Fire area (Rowland et al. 1983). Wintering populations on Bandelier and adjacent LANL and Santa Fe National Forest lands were estimated in 1989 to be 1000-2000 individuals (R. Isler, New Mexico Dept. of Game and Fish-1989 personal o 0 0 communication). Annual helicopter counts in o 0 o 0 Bandelier since 1990 similarly suggest that on the o 0 order of 1500 elk now regularly winter on Bandelier and the adjoining portions of the_ La La Mesa Fire Mesa Fire area, since about 500 to over 900 animals • 1 Elk were being counted in 1-3 hours of flight time • 2 Elk o 5 Elk

(Table 2). If there were 100 elk wintering in the o 10 Elk Bandelier area in 1978 and 1500 elk in 1992, this o 20 Elk indicates an annual growth rate of 21.3%, and a 3.6 o 50 Elk year doubling time! Some of this rapid population increase undoubt­ N edly reflects concentration of animals into this fa­ ~ vorable wintering habitat. Recent aerial surveys I------t----1 o 1 2 kilometers clearly show that winter elk use is generally fo­ cused on the La Mesa Fire area (Figure 3). Protec­ Figure 4.-Aerial survey observations of elk at Bandelier National tion from human disturbance and the availability Monument, 1993. The solid line represents the park boundary, of needed food resources are likely key factors be­ dashed lines major canyon drainages. The linear-bounded, hind these winter elk concentrations. The fire con­ northwestern portion of the park was not surveyed. verted dense, monotypic ponderosa pine forests into a more productive and diverse mosaic of grassland, shrubland, and forests, resulting in a - joining lands, elk use was observed to be particu­ corresponding diversity of herbaceous and woody larly widespread and relatively abundant across food available for elk to incorporate into their lower elevation portions of the park (Figure 4). eclectic diets (see Rowland et al. 1983, Wolters­ At the time of the initial post-La Mesa Fire stud­ This Volume). Also, the moderate elevations of the ies, elk populations on Bandelier were relatively La Mesa Fire area (between 2000 and 2600 m) ap­ small and only used the burn area in the winter, parently provide a locally optimum balance be­ but the attractiveness of the burn for elk and the tween vegetation that is sufficiently productive to potential for rapid population growth were appar­ be attractive and winter snow conditions which ent. For example, White (1981) predicted that: allow elk to access their potential food. The habitat created by the La Mesa fire and However, an exception to this pattern of concen­ the use of this habitat by elk may cause a fu­ trated elk use occurred during the winter of 1992- ture overpopulation of elk. Problems related to 1993 (Figure 4). Interspersed snow and rain storms overpopulation include damage to vegetation, created dense, icy snowpack conditions which ap­ which increases soil erosion, and an increase in parently restricted elk utilization of the grassy La accidents between elk and automobiles. Be­ Mesa Fire burn area that winter (cf. Lyon and Ward cause neither Bandelier National Monument 1982:471). As a result, many fewer elk were ob­ nor the Laboratory allows public hunting on served in the burn area that winter (Figure 4, Table their lands, elk populations will be difficult to 2). Also, the large herds of 100+ animals which control. The hunting pressure necessary to have been evident every other year (Figure 3) were control elk herds often drives them to the refuges absent during the 1993 survey, which allowed all provided by Bandelier and the Laboratory. surveyed animals to be classified that year. While total elk numbers were apparently depressed in The natural plant succession that will occur Bandelier that winter as more elk dispersed to ad- on the La Mesa burn also may lead to elk over-

187 population and to the subsequent problem of tions where food may be less plentiful or they are elk-damaged vegetation. Early successional more subject to human disturbance. However, the stages are preferred by elk for wintering habi­ burgeoning of the local elk population has occur­ tat, as demonstrated by the response of radio­ red despite greater than average snowpack condi­ collared animals to the fire habitat. A popula­ tions most winters since the La Mesa Fire, includ­ tion increase probably will result. However, ing the rec:ord snowfall winter of 1986-87 (Bowen later successional stages (that is, as a ponde- 1990:150, unpublished data on file at Bandelier) rosa pine forest replaces the present grass and the icy snows of 1992-1993 (personal observa­ cover) will not be beneficial to elk. Therefore, tion). This suggests that snow conditions in the any population increase caused by the cur­ Jemez Mountains will seldom serve to directly re­ rently available food supply on the La Mesa duce current elk population levels. Indeed, most burn may lead to an overpopulation at later winters some elk are able to stay at relatively high stages when less food is available. elevations throughout the winter, e.g., elk typically use south-facing slopes winter-long in the Valle San Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, these predic- Antonio area (P. Cassidy-personal communication). tions are becoming reality in the Bandelier area. All local observers agree that over the past sev­ eral years more elk are wintering farther down the RECENT ELK-RELATED mesas of the Pajarito Plateau. Moreover, in recent OBSERVATIONS IN THE BANDELIER AREA years resident populations have developed at lower elevations. In Bandelier, the aerial surveys While there is lio doubt that the local elk herd conducted each winter since 1990 typically find has grown rapidly during the last three decades, groups of elk all the way down to the Rio Grande existing data are inadequate to accurately deter­ (Figures 3 and 4). Indeed, the 2/1/93 aerial survey mine the current population trend. As described found the largest groups of elk at low elevations in above, recent aerial surveys at Bandelier are beset pinon-juniper woodland, with groups as large as by high levels of uncertainty. In particular, the 18 animals observed along the Rio Grande (Figure large percentage of unclassified animals in most 4). Elk have been year-round residents on Burnt recent surveys (up to 80% unclassified-see Table Mesa since at least 1989, when cow and calf groups 2) and the lack of any measures of variance reduces were repeatedly observed by archeologists work­ the reliability of any conclusions derived from ing in that area. In early 1991, certainly for the first these data. The large interannual variability in _ time in over 100 years, elk began to utilize the open some observed survey parameters (e.g., the headquarters area of Frijoles Canyon on winter bull:cow ratio) further suggests cautious use of evenings. Elk were first heard bugling in pinon­ these values. Still, inasmuch as these are the best juniper areas near Juniper Campground in fall of local data available, some survey results are worth 1991 (personal observation). Elk sign (tracks, drop­ reporting, along with a variety of other elk-related pings) are now seen year-round throughout the observations from this area. park, including low-elevation woodlands and can­ In the period 1990-1995, winter juvenile:adult yons. Adjoining Bandelier's south boundary, cow ratios in Bandelier elk averaged 0.28, with a range and calf elk have been observed year-round in the from 0.15 to 0.46 (Table 2). These values suggest Canada de Cochiti area in and downstream of that significant population growth may be continu­ Dixon's orchards (elevation <1740 m) since sum­ ing, unless adult mortality rates are greater than mer of 1992. seems likely for this relatively well-protected (i.e. Similarly, Santa Fe National Forest staff have little-hunted) subherd. Indeed, true juvenile:adult observed signs of expanding range and increasing ratios may be even higher, given that large cow:calf elk impact in the Jemez Mountains (personal com­ herds could not be classified in most years. There is munications with M. Orr, Espanola District biolo­ also a trend of increasing juvenile:adult ratios since gist, and J. Elson, Forest Range /Wildlife staff of­ 1993 at Bandelier. However, the implication of ficer), including: heavy browsing on New Mexico these ratios for elk population growth is uncertain without better mortality data. - locust, aspen stems, and Gambel's and wavyleaf oak; barking of aspen stands; and intense grazing Deep or icy winter snowpacks, or unusually cold pressure on moist montane meadows throughout weather, can act as a check to elk populations by the Jemez Mountains (see Wolters, This Volume). causing them to expend more energy to move and Concentrated grazing by wintering elk certainly dig for food, and by forcing them to lower eleva- occurs on the USFS portions of the La Mesa Fire

188 burn adjoining Bandelier (Figure 3), although de­ drivers commonly encounter elk along local high­ termination of elk grazing effects is confounded in ways. The Los Alamos Police Department recorded many areas by the presence of cattle, especially in at least 51 car accidents involving elk, and 54 with moist meadows and riparian settings. Greater year­ deer, between January 1990 and February 1995 round use of lower elevation areas is being ob­ (Gonzales et al. 1995). At least 29 additional acci­ served throughout much of the Forest, and elk dents were recorded during this time period as have recently colonized the Caja del Rio area, op­ "animal", most of which likely involved elk or posite the Rio Grande from Bandelier. For example, deer. These encounters account for about 6% of all on 5/24/95 two cow elk were seen along the Rio accidents in Los Alamos County (Los Alamos Po­ Grande about 2 km south of the mouth of Frijoles lice Dept.-unpublished data). While two-thirds of Creek, across the river from Bandelier on Forest elk-related 3ccidents occurred in fall or winter, this Service land (S. Fettig-personal communication). hazard is now present year-round and affects roads While definite elk effects are certainly observed in through low-elevation woodlands. Regrowth of a number of particular areas, the extensiveness of trees and shrubs near the road in the 1977 fire area negative impacts is unknown and available evi­ is decreasing visibility and further increasing the dence does not show that elk populations are cur­ hazard of collisions with animals. rently pushing against some sort of ecological car­ rying capacity all across the Jemez Mountains. Resource Impacts in the Bandelier Area Los Alamos National Laboratory biologists have also observed recent increases in elk numbers and As large herbivores, elk can playa key role in spread of elk-use areas within LANL (personal structuring local ecosystems (Kay 1990, 1994). Thus communications with T. Foxx and J. Biggs). There the recent increases in elk numbers and range are is ample evidence of elk in all Technical Areas, with having a number of effects on local resource val­ year-round use seen throughout the Lap since the ues. For example, elk use of the La Mesa Fire area early 1990's. Elk with calves are now observed in is so ubiquitous that it is difficult to find upland summer at Mesa del Buey and in lower Pajarito areas that have not been recently affected by elk­ Canyon (near White Rock). Elk tracks are observed mediated transfers of nutrients, as evidenced by all the way down to the Rio Grande in the TA-33 the fecal pellet groups of elk (see C. White, This area. Overflight prohibitions have precluded aerial Volume). survey efforts to date, but it is apparent that large Many examples of elk impacts on Bandelier veg­ numbers of elk winter on LANL lands, which in'­ etation have become apparent. For example, the clude a portion of the La Mesa Fire area immedi­ shattered rosettes of Yucca baccata found across lo­ ately north of Bandelier. The western lands of San cal pinon-juniper woodlands each spring indicate Ildefonso Pueblo, which adjoin LANL, White Rock, one food preference of wintering elk. Intensive elk and the detached Tsankawi Unit of Bandelier, also browsing has largely destroyed aspen (Populus receive considerable winter use by elk. Elk have tremuloides) reproduction from upland portions of been causing damage to yards in the White Rock the La Mesa Fire (e.g., Apache Mesa, Mesa del Rito) townsite for a number of years (at least throughout and the headwaters of the Frijoles watershed, the 1990's), causing conflict between people who while mature aspen trees are heavily barked in like to feed the elk and those who dislike the harm many areas (cf. Allen 1989:136-138). Photographs to their property. taken from permanent points in open grasslands Contamination of elk by radioactive materials at on Cerro Grande reveal that clumps of the shrub LANL has received study, with conclusions to date Holodiscus dumosa were browsed back severely be­ indicating little cause for concern (Meadows and tween October 1983 and October 1992. In the prime Salazar 1982, Meadows and Hakonson 1982, elk wintering areas of the La Mesa Fire, browsing Fresquez et al. 1995-a). However, recent findings of effects are evident on a variety of shrubs, including high levels of strontium-90 (Fresquez et al. 1995-b) New Mexico locust (Robinia neomexicana), various in a preferred browse species (rabbitbrush), and oak (Quercus) species, and especially the small the small sample sizes of elk tissue sampled in the buckbrush (Ceanothus fendleri), which in particular past, suggests the potential for unassessed elk (and is severely browsed. The uniformly mowed tops of deer) contamination problems. young locust sprouts indicates that elk browsing is currently a major factor slowing the still-rapid Elk have become an important traffic hazard in spread of locust clones across wide portions of the Los Alamos County (Burns 1992), as night-time 1977 burn. Elk buckrubs are also somewhat slow-

189 ing tree re-establishment into the La Mesa Fire Elk are large animals-the mean weight of 510- burn area (cf. Allen 1989:137). cal adult females was 233 kg (513Ib) (Meadows and Hakonson 1982), and adult males of Rocky Moist meadows in Bandelier are being kept in an Mountain elk typically weigh over 300 kg (Peek early seral stage by excessive elk use (see Wolters, 1982). The concentrated hoof action of large num­ This Volume). Similar impacts are apparent in bers of these heavy animals is also starting to dam­ . nearby portions of the Jemez Mountains, where elk age park resources. Ongoing revegetation research and cattle combine to overgraze many meadows in pinon -juniper woodlands (Chong 1994, B. (personal observation). Portions of the grassy La Jacobs-personal communication) reveals that by Mesa Fire burn area are also being utilized heavily spring elk hoofprints can cover most of the bare by elk (e.g., Escobas Mesa, see Wolters, This Vol­ ground surface between woodland trees. Similarly, ume). The initial post-fire flush of high plant pro­ recent surveys have found that numerous archeo­ ductivity has passed, and vegetational succession logical sites within Bandelier are being damaged has begun to return many La Mesa Fire areas back by trampling from large ungulates, mostly elk (Fig­ to pine forests again, which will support fewer elk. ure 6). New elk trails continue to emerge in various These observations imply increasing pressure parts of the park, from mesatops to steep canyon through time on other elk-favored vegetation types walls. in Bandelier if elk populations remain at or exceed current levels. Water sources, which are relatively scarce in higher elevation areas of the Jemez Mountains, are Severe erosion problems exist in Bandelier's being degraded in portions of the park and nearby pinon-juniper woodlands (Allen 1989:165-167), areas by heavy elk use. Some small ponds display and park resource managers are concerned that elk-trampled margins, wallows, and highly turbid increasing elk utilization of these areas may exacer­ water (personal observation). These scarce waters bate these erosion problems by reducing already are ecologically important for reasons which may stressed herbaceous ground cover in the be compromised by elk-induced changes in water interspaces between the small trees. By their sheer quality, (such as the breeding of amphibians). I numbers and large food intake requirements (on have observed various places where elk have the order of 10 to 25 pounds of forage per day per turned small seeps into wallows, such as sites lo­ ad ult elk [Nelson and Leege 1982:363]), elk grazing cated west of Corral Hill, near the headwaters of could easily have negative impacts on woodland Frijoles Creek, and at the base of the Canada Bonito conditions analogous to the well-documented ef-:­ grassland. fects of smaller feral burros in Bandelier from ca. 1930-1980 (Koehler 1974, Earth Environmental Elk may compete with mule deer in various Consultants 1974, USDI National Park Service ways (Nelson 1982:425; Lyon and Ward 1982:464). 1976, Potter and Berger 1977). Any similar in­ While deer populations in many parts of New creases in soil erosion from LANL lands might lead Mexico have been depressed in recent years, to increased runoff of radioactive materials, such as Bandelier has exhibited relatively high deer popu­ depleted uranium, which is a widespread surface lations for several decades (Allen 1989:132-134, soil contaminant in some woodland areas of LANL Table 4), probably because it offers a fairly secure (Becker 1992). refuge from poaching as well as legal hunting. Eberhardt and White (1979) demonstrated that Because local archeological sites are primarily LANL deer occupied consistent home ranges year­ found in woodland areas this erosion is also a ma­ round, although this was prior to the recent jor cultural resource problem at Bandelier, as about buildup of elk numbers. Aerial surveys in 70% of archeological sites within Bandelier are be­ Bandelier since 1990 provide indications that mule ing damaged by soil erosion (Head 1992). deer numbers may be in decline (Table 4), although Bandelier has been testing methods for increasing cautious interpretation is required due to the large herbaceous ground cover in eroding woodland and unquantified uncertainties associated with areas (Chong 1994; unpublished data on file at these data. The spatial distributions of elk and deer Bandelier), which are largely in remote portions of revealed by the winter aerial surveys (compare the Bandelier Wilderness that would be attractive Figures 3 and 5) suggest that deer are largely ex­ wintering habitat for elk if adequate food existed. cluded from zones of high elk density in the La Thus concern exists that the potential for successful Mesa Fire area. Heavy elk use of the La Mesa Fire erosion control will be set back by the attraction of area may be reducing winter deer utilization of this more elk to the treatment areas. relatively desirable grass and shrub-rich zone, forc-

190 .Siles Impacted by Large Mammals

•

•# • • • • ,0 ~ . •• • • ~ La Mesa Fire • . • • • 1 Deer • • 0°0 - 0 • 0 • 2Deer • • o 5 Deer •• o l0Deer • o 20 Deer • • • • • • N N • • 1- 1- •• • f------+-- f------+-- o 1 2 kilometers o 1 2 kilometers •

Figure 5.-Aerial survey observations of deer at Bandelier National Figure 6.-Archeological sites impacted by elk or deer at Bandelier Monument, 1990-1995. Each point represents an observation National Monument, based upon post-1986 surveys of about in a particular year. The solid line represents the park boundary, 44% of the park (unpublished data on file at Bandelier). dashed lines major canyon drainages. The linear-bounded, northwestern portion of the park was not surveyed.

ing the deer to occupy less productive areas Table 4.-Winter aerial count data, deer, Bandelier National downslope in pinon-juniper woodlands and Monument. thereby diminishing their winter survival and sub­ YEAR # DEER 0: Q :JUV DIM sequent reproductive success. 1984 24 19 100 50 0.46 1985 18 160 100 100 ?0.3 CONCLUDING THOUGHTS 1987 121 46 100 70 1.4 Overall wintering conditions for elk will likely improve across the Jemez Mountains during the 1990 156 25 100 55 1.68 coming decade. Land management agencies will 1991 161 26 100 68 1.16 create more grassy winter ranges at moderate to 1992a 53 32 100 57 0.67 low elevations through ongoing "ecosystem man­ 1992b 78 26 100 56 0.50 agement" efforts to reduce forest and woodland 1993 137 24 100 48 0.64 densities with large-scale prescribed burns and 1994 79 7 100 77 0.40 understory thinning projects. As a result, there will 1995 46 9 100 65 0.40 continue to be potential for further elk population Explanation of Headings (from left to right): increases in Unit 6. YEAR = year of helicopter survey (precise dates in Table 2) On the other hand, large portions of the La Mesa # DEER = total # deer counted Fire burn area may become less desirable habitat 0: =number of adult and yearling males per 100 non-juvenile female deer for elk as vegetational succession proceeds. Many Q = non-juvenile female deer, standardized at 100 open grassland patches are rapidly turning into :JUV = number of juveniles per 100 non-juvenile female deer shrub thickets, and ponderosa pine regeneration is DIM = number of deer counted per minute of flight counting time

191 well established across extensive areas. While elk managers in New Mexico who have overriding herbivory is modulating the successional pathway management objectives which may be inconsistent of much of the burn area, it will not prevent open with high elk numbers. grasslands from returning to forests which will The NMGF draft management plan seems cau­ support fewer elk. Still, park prescribed burning tious in its ,formulation of elk-related issues programs (Lissoway 1995) and other vegetation (NMGF 1995). It states that the main problems spe­ management efforts (Sydoriak 1995) are expected cific to Unit 6 are (sic): to maintain or develop herbaceous understories throughout the park, so ample elk wintering habi­ 1) "Poor quality winter ranges cause elk to con­ tat should continue to be available in the park. centrate on National Park, National Laboratory, Tribal, and private lands creating difficulty in at­ There are multiple indications that excessive taining hunt objectives and trespass problems"; conservatism should be avoided in managing the and 2) "Divergent management objectives of New overall population of elk in Unit 6. Current elk Mexico, Los Alamos National Labs and Bandelier populations are apparently larger than anything National Monument, and the Baca Location ham­ known for at least the past 800 years. Various signs pers effective elk management" . of elk-induced resource stress are becoming appar­ ent, and the potential for elk-related conflicts be­ The draft plan suggests that the primary strate­ tween land managers has been increasing. With the gies to resolve these problems are to: probability of further improvements in winter 1) "Develop cooperative agreements with public ranges and the demonstrated high reproductive land agencies and affected agencies and individu­ potential of cow-dominated elk populations, elk als to enhance winter habitat on public lands"; and numbers could rise even further. Major data uncer­ 2) "Develop cooperative management agreements tainties preclude precise knowledge of elk popula­ with the Baca Location, Los Alamos National Labs tion dynamics, including responses to management and Bandelier National Monument to meet joint actions such as hunting. Recent growthin elk num­ objectives" . bers has coincided with the anomalously wet pe­ riod of the past 18 years (Grissino-Mayer 1995, These are important issues and strategies to pur­ Allen-in review). Current concerns over elk ef­ sue, especially the emphasis on cooperative inter­ fects on other resources will become more urgent actions among local land managers. In addition, at when the next extended dry spell hits New Mexico, least two key questions must be thoroughly ad­ as drought will highlight elk impacts on vegetation dressed if the proposed cooperative agreements are and competition with livestock on public and pri­ to be successful: 1) What ecological considerations vate lands. Overall, prudence suggests limiting (and tradeoffs) should be included in determining further growth in Unit 6 elk populations until some elk-related management goals? 2) Given overall of these issues are resolved. In this light, the higher social and ecological considerations and trade-offs, harvest levels estimated for Unit 6 in 1994 (Table 3) what are appropriate target numbers of elk, both are encouraging. overall and for particular portions of Unit 6? The New Mexico Game and Fish Department Bandelier is just beginning to quantitatively has recently been soliciting comments from the document the impacts of elk grazing to park re­ public and various interest groups in an effort to sources and review the options which may be develop a formal "Long Range Plan for the Man­ available for controlling excessively large in-park agement of New Mexico's Elk". The October 1995 populations. A number of research needs have draft of this document (NMGF 1995) opens with been identified to address elk-related issues at the stated goal "(T)hat hunters and interested indi­ Bandelier (Sydoriak 1995), including needs for bet­ viduals enjoy high levels of elk recreational oppor­ ter data on population dynamics, seasonal use of tunities and experiences". These social consider­ habitats across landscape gradients, "migration" ations are certainly important. However, the single­ corridors, effects of elk use on herbaceous vegeta­ species focus on recreational considerations pre­ tion and soil surface conditions, and possible de­ sented by this document, to the near-exclusion of velopment of carrying capacity indicators. However, ecological information or wider resource manage­ it is already apparent that novel management actions ment issues, is worrisome. Elk management needs may be required within Bandelier to prevent exces­ to be considered within broader contexts of both sive elk impacts to various park resources unless ad­ societal and ecological issues, otherwise unneces­ equate control is also applied to overall elk popula­ sary conflicts could develop with various land tion numbers in the Jemez Mountains.

192 How will local elk populations be limited? Per­ Randy Isler, Lisa Fisher, and Paul Cassidy. Aerial haps some combination of public and private hunt­ inventories of elk and deer over Bandelier have ing similar to the current mix will be adequate to been conducted in cooperation with NMGF, with control elk numbers, although the geography of direct participation by NMGF employees Paul Bandelier-area land ownerships certainly increases Cassidy, Robert Livingstone, and R.J. Kirkpatrick. the difficulties in managing local elk populations. Steve Bracker and Kay Beeley provided assistance To date the Baca Ranch has supported high elk with figures and tables. Review comments by numbers for reasons ranging from aesthetic appre­ Stephen Fettig, Lisa Fisher, and Tom O'Shea im­ ciation of free-ranging herds of these magnificent proved this paper. Funding support has been pro­ animals to the favorable economics of their trophy vided by the National Park Service and National elk hunting business (where more elk means a Biological Service. larger pool from which to select high-value bulls). While the current seasonal migration patterns of local elk have yet to be fully determined, itis clear LITERATURE CITED that many elk move directly from the Baca to the security of Bandelier and LANL in the fall, avoid­ Allen, CD. 1989. Changes in the Landscape of the Jemez Mts., ing any exposure to public hunting pressure. This New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California, Berkeley. 349 pp. obviously creates population control challenges, as Allen, CD. In review. Ecological patterns and environmental hunting on Bandelier is expressly prohibited by Code change in the Bandelier landscape. Chapter 2 in: T.A. of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 36, Part 2, Section Kohler (ed.), Village Formation on the Pajarito Plateau, 2.1 (preservation of natural resources), Section 2.2 New Mexico: The Archaeology of Bandelier National (wildlife protection), and Section 2.4 (weapons, traps, Monument. University of New Mexico Press, etc.). Opening the park to public hunting would re­ Albuquerque, NM. quire an act of Congress, and direct reductions by Allen, CD., R Touchan, and T.W. Swetnam. 1995. Landscape­ park or NMGF staff for management purposes would scale fire history studies support fire management action at be controversial and require substantial NEPA docu­ Bandelier. Park Science 15(3):18-19. mentation and public review. However, there may be Bailey, V. 1931. Mammals of New Mexico. North American other ways to reduce the sense of security elk cur­ Fauna No. 53. US Dept. of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological Survey, Washington, D.C 412 pp. rently experience in Bandelier that could decrease the Bandelier, A.F. 1892. The Valley of the Rio Grande between the attractiveness of the park as wintering habitat. Rito de los Frijoles and the mouth of the Jemez River. In conclusion, the habitat changes initiated by­ Investigations among the Indians of the Southwestern the La Mesa Fire have supported the recent devel­ United States, carried on mainly in the years from 1880 to opment of a large elk population in the Bandelier 1885, Part 2. Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University Press. Cambridge, area. Such high elk numbers are apparently an eco­ Massachusetts. logically novel situation, and many signs of elk­ Bear, G.D., G.C White, L.H. Carpenter, RB. Gill, and OJ related resource stress are becoming apparent. The Essex. 1989. Evaluations of aerial mark-resighting estimates Bandelier area elk population is inextricably linked of elk populations. J. Wildl. Manage. 53:908-915. to the overall status of elk in the Jemez Mountains. Becker, N.M. 1992. Quantification of uranium transport away Large uncertainties and data gaps cloud our under­ from firing sites at Los Alamos National Laboratory-A standing of current elk population dynamics in mass balance approach. In: RG. Post (ed.), Waste Manage­ Unit 6. Care should be taken to avoid further in­ ment '92, Vol. 1, Technology and Programs for Radioactive creases in Jemez Mountains elk numbers until the Waste Management and Environmental Restoration. resource impacts of this historically unprecedented Library of Congress #86-644-175. phenomenon (high elk numbers) can be identified, Bowen, B.M. 1990. Los Alamos Climatology. LA-11735-MS, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New desirable population levels agreed upon (based to Mexico. a significant degree upon ecological information Brown, D.E. (ed.) 1988. The wolf in the Southwest. Univ. of and resource carrying capacities, as well as social Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ. 195 p. considerations), and appropriate cooperative man­ Burns, D. 1992. Beware elk on roads. Newspaper article in Los agement strategies determined and implemented. Alamos Monitor, Dec. 2, 1992. Los Alamos, NM. Bryant, L.D., and C Maser. 1982. Classification and Distribu­ tion, pp. 1-60 In: Elk of North America-Ecology and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Management, J.W. Thomas and D.E. Toweill eds. Stackpole Books, Hamburg, Pennsylvania. A variety of NMGF officials graciously provided Caughley, G. 1974. Bias in aerial survey. J. Wildl. Manage. unpublished data, including Daryl Weybright, 38:921-933.

193 Chong, G.W. 1994. Recommendations to improve revegetation Lang, RW. and A.H. Harris. 1984. The Faunal Remains from success in a pifton-juniper woodland in New Mexico: A Arroyo Hondo Pueblo, New Mexico: A Study in Short­ hierarchical approach. M.S. thesis, Univ. of New Mexico, Term Subsistence Change. School of American Research Albuquerque, NM. 76 pp. Press (Arroyo Hondo Archaeological Series No.5). Santa Conley, W., R Sivinski, and G. White. 1979. Responses of elk Fe, NM. 316 pp. (Cervus elaphus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) to Ligon, J.S. 1927. Wildlife of New Mexico: It's Conservation wildfire: Changes in utilization and migration patterns. and Management. State Game Commission, Department of Unpublished report on file at Bandelier National Monu­ Game and Fish, Santa Fe, NM. 212 pp. ment, New Mexico. 88 p. Lissoway, J.D. (ed.) 1995. Fire Management Plan, Bandelier Davis, D.E., and RL. Winstead. 1980. Estimating the numbers National Monument. USDI National Park Service, Bandelier of wildlife populations. pp. 221-245 In: S.D. Schemnitz National Monument, Los Alamos, New Mexico. 151 pp. (ed.), Wildlife Management Techniques ManuaL The Lyon, L.J., and A.L. Ward. 1982. Elk and land management, Wildlife Society, Washington, D.C pp. 443-477 In: Elk of North America-Ecology and Eberhardt, L.E., and G.C White. 1979. Movements of mule Management, J.W. Thomas and D.E. Toweill (eds.). deer on the Los Alamos National Environmental Research Stackpole Books, Hamburg, Pennsylvania. Park. LA-7742, Los Alamos National Laboratory: Los Martin, P.S., and CR Szuter. In review. Reinventing "wild" Alamos, New Mexico. America: Legacy of the keystone species. In: CL. Redman, Earth Environmental Consultants, Incorporated. 1974. Soil S.R James, P.R Fish, and J.D. Rogers (eds.), Prehistoric survey and survey of range and ecological conditions on a Human Impact on the Environment: A Global Perspective. southern part of Bandelier National Monument. Unpub­ Meadows, S.D., and T.E. Hakonson. 1982. Contribution of lished report on file at Bandelier National Monument, NM. tissues to body mass in elk. J. Wildl. Manage. 46(3):838-841. 29pp. Meadows, S.D., and J. Salazar. 1982. An investigation of Findley, J.S. 1987. The natural history of New Mexican radionuclide concentrations in tissues of elk utilizing Los mammals. Univ. of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, New Alamos National Laboratory. Health Physics 3(4):595-598. Mexico. Nelson, J.R 1982. Relationships of elk and other large Fresquez, P.R, D.A. Armstrong, and J.G. Salazar. J995-a. herbivores, pp. 415-441 In: Elk of North America-Ecology Radionuclide concentrations in elk that winter on Los and Management, J.W. Thomas and D.E. Toweill (eds.). Alamos National Laboratory lands. LA-12795-MS, Los Stackpole Books, Hamburg, Pennsylvania. Alamos National Laboratory. Los Alamos, New Mexico. 5 pp. Nelson, J.R, and T.A. Leege. 1982. Nutritional requirements Fresquez, P.R, T.S. Foxx, and L. Naranjo Jr. 1995-b. Strontium and food habits, pp. 323-367 In: Elk of North America­ concentrations in Chamisa (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) shrub Ecology and Management, J.W. Thomas and D.E. Toweill plants growing in a former liquid waste disposal area in (eds.). Stackpole Books, Hamburg, Pennsylvania. Bayo Canyon. LA-13050-MS, Los Alamos National New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 1995. Long­ Laboratory. Los Alamos, New Mexico. 8 pp. Range Plan for the Management of New Mexico's Elk: Gonzales, T.C, T.S. Foxx, and J. Biggs. 1995. Analysis of 1995-2002. Draft of October 10, i995. New Mexico Depart­ animal-related accidents in Los Alamos County. LA-UR- ment of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, NM. 25 pp. 95-3950, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, Osborn, A.J. 1993. Snowblind in the desert Southwest: New Mexico. 8 pp. moisture islands, ungulate ecology, and alternative Grissino-Mayer, H.D. 1995. Tree-Ring Reconstructions of prehistoric overwintering strategies. J. Anthropological Climate and Fire History at El Malpais National Monu­ Research 49:135-164. ment, New Mexico. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of Arizona, Peek, J.M. 1982. Elk, pp. 851-861 In: Wild Mammals of North Tucson, AZ. 407 pp. America, J. Chapman and G. Feldhamer (eds.). Johns Head, G.N. 1992. The Bandelier Archeological Survey: 1991 Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Preliminary Report. Unpublished report on file at Potter, L.D., and S. Berger. 1977. Deer-burro utilization and Bandelier National Monument, NM. 30 pp. competition study, Bandelier National Monument. Unpub­ Henderson, J., and J.P. Harrington. 1914. Ethnozoology of the lished report on file at Bandelier National Monument, New Tewa Indians. Smithsonian Institution Bureau of American Mexico. 44 pp. Ethnology, Washington, D.C Rowland, M.M., A.W. Alldredge, J.E. Ellis, RJ. Weber, and Kay, CE. 1990. Yellowstone's Northern Elk Herd: A Critical G.C White. 1983. Comparative winter diets of elk in New Evaluation of the "Natural Regulation" Paradigm. Ph.D. Mexico. J. WildL Manage. 47(4):924-932. Dissertation, Utah State University, Logan. 490 pp. Samuel, M.D., E.O. Garton, M.W. Schlegel, and RG. Carson. Kay, CE. 1994. Aboriginal overkill: The role of Native 1987. Visibility bias during aerial surveys of elk in north­ Americans in structuring western ecosystems. Human central Idaho. J. Wildl. Manage. 51:622-630. Nature 5:359-398. Steinert, S.F., H.D. Riffel, and G.C White. 1994. Comparisons Kie, J.G. 1988. Performance in Wild Ungulates: Measuring of big game harvest estimates from check station and Population Density and Condition of Individuals. USDA telephone surveys. J. WildL Manage. 58(2):335-340. For. Servo Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-106, Berkeley, Calif. Sydoriak, C (ed.) 1995. Resource Management Plan, Bandelier Koehler, D.A. 1974. The ecological impact of feral burros on National Monument. USDI National Park Service, Bandelier National Monument. Unpublished report on file Bandelier National Monument, Los Alamos, New Mexico. at Bandelier National Monument, NM. 78 pp. . 372 pp.

194 Touchan, R., CD. Allen, and T.W. Swetnam. This volume. Fire White, CS. This volume. The effects of fire on nitrogen history and climatic patterns in ponderosa pine and mixed­ cycling processes within Bandelier National Monument, conifer forests of the Jemez Mountains, northern New NM. Mexico. White, G.C 1981. Biotelemetry studies on elk. LA-8529-NERp, USDI National Park Service. 1976. Environmental Assess­ Los Alamos National Laboratory. Los Alamos, New ment, Feral Burro Management, Bandelier National Mexico. Monument, New Mexico. National Park Service, Santa Fe, White, G.C 1983. Numerical estimation of survival rates from NM.85pp. band-recovery and biotelemetry data. J. Wildlife Manage. Weber, B.J., M.L. Wolfe, G.C White, and M.M. Rowland. 1984. 47(3):716-728. Physiologic response of elk to differences in winter range Wolters, G.L. This volume. Elk effects on Bandelier National quality. J. Wildlife Manage. 48(1):248-253. Monument meadows and grasslands.

195